Re: <nettime> The problem with file-sharing

[". __ ." <mail_box@gmx.net>]

I think it is to narrow a perspective to focus only on the music business
without taking into account the negative side effects this will have on
other areas.

While I agree that we are so much "programmed" that it would be difficult
at first to have to search for good music again. But people would adapt
soon. And, let=B4s be honest, there would soon be another, free alternative
telling us what we have to listen to ;-)

While I do understand the basic problem of the music industry, I just
cannot agree on the method they use to defend "their" property. They lobby
for strict laws and severe punishment - and do not want to see, that these
laws affect a variety of other areas, where this leads to tragic/comic
problems - especially in the academic community, non-profit Orgs and so on.
And I do not want to mention the privacy problem (for there has to be an
end to this mail).

The fascinating thing about the net is the uncomplicated way to get
information on a subject, be it music, text, information, and be able to
compare these. Only this act allows for *some* choice and a little
overview. The best example is the British Dossier on Iraq, which was pasted
together from a variety of other, out of date sources. Because of the net,
people and professionals alike could download and spread it freely, making
it possible to uncover the *creative* way, the British "Intelligence"
Community gathers informations, which may be the basis for a decision to go
to war.

P2P-Networks are just a hook to get people to know more about the
possibilities, with music as the bait ;-) The proposed interest group
should not defend these networks as a means to download music but for the
reasons above mentioned... And I think that is why so many different
groups, with different goals, approaches to and views of the net do fight
against these developments - especially if govts have an excuse now, like
the war on terror....

Under the new laws it could perhaps be no longer allowed to publish a
sensitive document online, only in written form (so that one gets the
adress of the person) - imagine how long it would have taken people in the
states to find out about the copy&past action...

One could also argue, that, if documents were only available through paid
services, the British Govt would not have found something to copy&paste...
but that is another story ;-)

Cheers,

g

At 17:29 09.02.03 -0800, Morlock Elloi wrote:

> > So the only possible reply we, as people who read our email on.screen
> > and do not let the secretary print them out, should somehow form an
> > international lobbying organization to be a balancing factor against the
> > interests of others in this matter...
>
>Good ... I'd like to see a subcommittee that will balance right to copy
>paper banknotes against interests of assorted governments.
 <...>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. This Anti-Virus Program seems to be very
good, However, I cannot be held responsible for any damages caused by Viruses
which evaded the scan.  Checked by AVG anti-virus system
(http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.449 / Virus Database: 251 - Release Date: 27.01.03

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net